79 comments to “Is Mona Lisa A Drag Queen?”

That doesn't make her a drag queen. Where the fake lashes and the highly arched eyebrows and her microphone? That just makes her the female version of him. And this is an old theory, where have you been?

And children still go hungry, but let's use a ton of money, time and press to pursue our intellectual curiosities. Sorry, I'm just sick of the detached intellectual communities right now. Rapunzel come down from your Ivory Tower. We already know it's him, so let it go and do something that matters NOW!

it seems that this question has always been around. as for exhuming the body of Da Vinci, that may be a question that gets rejected even before the the paperwork gets filled. I would vote no to the scientists and art historians who will place a request to exhume the skull. plus, Da Vinci would have placed another body in his tomb so that the mystery would be pursued by Nicolas Cage!

Leonardo could paint. But he could only paint one way. All his paintings look the same… and all the people painted from this time frame have the SAME cherub-looking face with the same refines features and the same lack of facial emotion. He painted for rich people and that is why he is famous.

Re: laurthib – really, this 'theory' has been around for decades, centuries (?), which lends the question… what the hell did you get out of your liberal arts diploma (if you ever got one) did you do anything with the arts or did you just come here because you heard there was a whole village of gay and bi guys and needed a reason to be here.

This is absolutely stupid, a waste of time, and money, and research. WHO THE FUCK CARES. DaVinci was a great artist and a brilliant man. If we all of a sudden find out if this was a painting of himself… what does that mean? What does that prove? What does that solve? What does that cure? Aren't there better things to research like what the fuck is wrong with Heidi Montag's brain?

Who cares? Even if it is Leonardo in drag, what is this fact going to change? Absolutely nothing. People will still be interested in seeing that painting, even though apparently, it's not all it's cracked up to be, I know people who have been to the Louvre and seen the Mona Lisa, and it's one of those things that you expect to be amazed by when you see them, and when you actually do, it's like, oh, there's the Mona Lisa, cool, and then you move on.

Re: steelers – in the past year or so, Carly has revealed that the song was written about Warren Beatty. Neil Diamond then took the cue and revealed that Sweet Caroline was written about Caroline Kennedy.

Didn't you go to college, Perez? This is one of the oldest suspicions– and I learned it in middle school.
And him drawing a female version of himself doesn't make him or the person in the painting a "drag queen." Drag queens are gay men that dress up as women, complete with makeup, heels, and false boobies; the Mona Lisa is, potentially, simply a female portrait of Da Vinci. Most people would refer to this as questioning sexual roles and androgyny, or you could simply call it illustrated cross-dressing. Drag queens are an entirely different animal.

this is old news. historians have been speculating for years that da vinci modeled the Mona after himself. Does that make him a drag queen? I don't think so. There is still mystery surrounding one of the most revered works of art in the western world after five hundred years, that just makes him a brilliant artist. He……, or she, will have the last laugh.

this is such old news, holy shit. i learned this years ago in my art history class, and i'm pretty sure it's true, just by comparing the two pieces of art. no need to exude da vinci's skull! what a waste of time and money

Re: MissLemon – you're so ignorant for trying to undermine Leonardo da Vinci. go to rome and look at what he did, how many things he painted. Also, why would famous people want a mediocre painter to do the ceiling in sistine chapel. dumbdumbdumb -and perez, what the fuck. are you too busy fantasizing about putting ur wang in celebs to realize things that have been taboo for YEARS?

This is an old, old theory that stems solely from the fact DeVinci was gay. There is no evidence that he was a cross-dresser. Considering that, I am surprised that Perez would give any credence to this! Most gay men are NOT cross-dressers. In fact, most cross-dressing men are NOT gay. This is an insane request: to exhume his body to reconstruct his face to prove what exactly? It won't happen and it shouldn't. People will continue to speculate, but this theory comes from the mistaken tie between homosexuality and cross-dressing - not any factual evidence. Is it POSSIBLE that Divinci used himself as the subject? Sure. Anything is POSSIBLE, but there is no evidence to prove it and exhuming his body won't accomplish anything. Also, it is disgusting!